Sign up Latest Topics Chat
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment  
Rudy Tinoco

Avatar / Picture

Founding Member
Registered:
Posts: 4,762
Reply with quote  #1 
Hi Fellas,

I've heard some good things over at the Cafe about the Redford stack.

One of the things that I don't like about the Tamariz stack is how clunky it is to get in NDO.
I'm considering changing to the Redford stack. Have any of you taken a look at it?

Rudy

__________________
www.youtube.com/themagiciansforum
http://www.facebook.com/themagiciansforum
0
Mike Powers

Avatar / Picture

Honored Member
Registered:
Posts: 2,389
Reply with quote  #2 
I went through the new book carefully in order to write the forward for Patrick. He's posted on this site. I'd go directly to the source.

What I like is the ability to get to Stebbins from new deck and then through a series of overhand shuffles, to Redford stack. The cool thing is you can get back to Stebbins with exactly the same sequence of shuffles. Also you can get to Stay stack as well. There's a bunch of built in items like poker deals too. Talk to Patrick.

Mike
0
Harry Lorayne

Avatar / Picture

Honored Member
Registered:
Posts: 2,343
Reply with quote  #3 
   Hey Rudy: Have you been receiving my emails? H.
0
luigimar

Avatar / Picture

Honored Member - Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 1,566
Reply with quote  #4 
Rudy,

I have had Patrick's book for about a month and a half and I've been practicing setting up the deck from new deck order, to Si Stebbins to Redford Stack (RS) back and forth. I still haven't memorized it but I am working on it. Nevertheless I can already do some effects from the book that do not require the order to be memorized and I have had some great results. 

This is what I wrote in the secret Facebook group dedicated to the RS about my experience, about 3 weeks ago: 

This weekend I was with a friend (a magician) and I had my deck handy so I took it out of its case and it was already in RS. I started shuffling the deck and then I did KING ME. It killed him. 2 more shuffles and I showed him the KM Poker deal (another effect in the book). His face was WTH?! One more shuffle and I was back in RS. I then did the sequence to go back to Si Stebbins and then I dealt 4 hands of 13 cards. We were talking while I was doing this and when I showed him the 4 hands with the cards (almost) in sequence, all the clubs together, hearts together, spades together and diamonds together, he was knocked out! It was a nice sequence that I did in an "impromptu" kind of way. I showed him the "shuffled deck" while it was in RD order so he was surprised to see the deck in (almost) new deck order at the end. I had to move some cards from beginning to end to have the cards in sequence but it was a nice way to finish an "impromptu" routine. I will keep practicing this so I can do the needed sequences (The Si Stebbins secret and the shuffle sequence to get into RS) without having to stop talking while I am counting the cards. I still need to memorize the stack but I am getting there.

I have had all Aronson's books and the original Mnemonica in Spanish for many years but I never took the time to memorize any of them. RS gave me the little push I needed to start working with a stack. Thanks Patrick for this. I hope I can write more about my RS adventures soon.

You need to have a good faro shuffle in order to do something similar to what I did and once you have memorized the stack, you can do miracles. Patrick has planned to continue publishing his work on this stack and in the future there will be more books dedicated to the RS. 

Now I need to go back to memorizing the stack...

__________________
Luigimar
Magic is Within...
0
Rudy Tinoco

Avatar / Picture

Founding Member
Registered:
Posts: 4,762
Reply with quote  #5 
Thanks Mike and Luis!

I'm adding this book to my wish list.

Rudy

__________________
www.youtube.com/themagiciansforum
http://www.facebook.com/themagiciansforum
0
Sean Keys

Inner Circle
Registered:
Posts: 29
Reply with quote  #6 
I was hooked on Aronson (and am still retaining it) but the Redford stack is quite compelling (and pretty easy to memorize). I've been putting a lot of work into a variation of his Temporarily Out of Order routine where you escalate from a single match co-incidence to matching multiple cards (basically pieces of Marlo's matching routine) but then close with the deck back in new deck order. Beautiful. The stack is incredibly fluid and flexible (mem to stay to parallel to NDO, etc.).
0
Zedd

Member
Registered:
Posts: 6
Reply with quote  #7 
I used the Aronson-Stack for many years but have changed to the Redford-Stack. For me, it's more versatile - i can go to SiStebbins, Staystack etc..... absolutely love it!!!

Best regards[wave]
0
KenTheriot

Avatar / Picture

Honored Member
Registered:
Posts: 1,243
Reply with quote  #8 
Wow, it seems like I am only scratching the surface with Aronson. I'm "fluent" in Aronson and am loathe to add another stack. seems like learning another language, almost. I'll add this to my note (My Evernote notebook on magic is getting massive[smile]) on the Memorized Deck for down the road, though. Thanks for the info!
0
Sean Keys

Inner Circle
Registered:
Posts: 29
Reply with quote  #9 
And the effect Totally Out of Order is a doozy. I've really been working on this - trying to make it my own. But, until I am rock solid on the stack, I'll still be using Aronson.
0
KenTheriot

Avatar / Picture

Honored Member
Registered:
Posts: 1,243
Reply with quote  #10 
How is it trying to keep two stacks memorized? It seems like that would be tough. Then again, I've had trouble with my memory all my life. Thank goodness for systems like Harry's. I passed many a test in college and beyond because of them. 
0
François Lagrange

Inner Circle
Registered:
Posts: 102
Reply with quote  #11 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zedd
I used the Aronson-Stack for many years but have changed to the Redford-Stack. For me, it's more versatile - i can go to SiStebbins, Staystack etc..... absolutely love it!!!

Best regards[wave]


What effects do you perform that use a Staystack?

Just curious. Often the built-in tricks in a stack are hardly worth performing. There are a massive amount of stack independent effects that are just stunning.

As to go from any shuffled deck to any stack (Aronson or other), a radix sort will do that for you under the guise of a trick. I think Bob Farmer's latest book explains that in detail - I've been told as I have not purchased a copy.
0
luigimar

Avatar / Picture

Honored Member - Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 1,566
Reply with quote  #12 
I use mainly 2 ideas with stay stack. One effect I learned in the second Roy Walton book. With 2 kings or like cards you find two matching cards. One that the spectator freely chooses and its mate. I love this effect.

The second is a matching routine I learned on the second Devious DVD by Mike Close. It is based on a Marlo routine.

If you want to do these routines and still remain prepared to go back to Redford Stack, I think you could use the 8 faro idea to apparently shuffle between effects.

__________________
Luigimar
Magic is Within...
0
Zedd

Member
Registered:
Posts: 6
Reply with quote  #13 
Hi Francois,

check Mnemonica and the work of Woody Aragon [wave]
0
Mind Phantom

Avatar / Picture

Honored Member
Registered:
Posts: 1,384
Reply with quote  #14 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Francois Lagrange


What effects do you perform that use a Staystack ?


I use Martin Nash's closer called Ovation. It's in his Charming Cheat series of video's. However, you need to do a deck switch before the effect.

I haven't found a way to bring in the "cooler" that I like, but I still practice this.

__________________
Self Concept Is Destiny...
0
Sean Keys

Inner Circle
Registered:
Posts: 29
Reply with quote  #15 
Re memorizing multiple stacks, I find it a bit like multiple phone numbers - you can keep them straight. That said, for the instantaneous recognition (with no thinking), Aronson definitely triggers first. not sure how this will pan out longer term. I also tried remember the sequence. So, for example, if you see the Ace of Spades, you think 6, 7, 10 (Aronson, Tamariz, Redford). At this point though, I'm not actively trying to maintain Tamariz.

Re stay stack, there are lots of great ideas from Close, Ackerman, Ortiz, Nash, etc. Redford shows how to use a deck switch to bring in the stack, then has a series of routines (based on Marlo's Matching Routine) that let you perform a few effects, each escalating in impact. Ultimately you end up in NDO. In his version, he goes to his stack first, then transitions to stay stack. I instead switch directly to his stay stack, which let's me escalate to the miracle phase (NDO) more quickly.

0
François Lagrange

Inner Circle
Registered:
Posts: 102
Reply with quote  #16 

Thank you Luigimar & Logan for listing the effects you perform with a staystack.

I’ve a copy of Rusduck’s The Cardiste. In it, Rusduck describes for the first time the idea of a staystack and its applications, as well as many other stack applications. It’s a quirky but great magazine (that you can purchase from Lybrary).

Are there any staystack effects that are not mainly mates matching? I am not keen on those.

P.S. In number 4 of The Cardiste, there's a wonderful tip about maintaining the stack with partial faros. I don think I've read that tip anywhere else.

0
luigimar

Avatar / Picture

Honored Member - Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 1,566
Reply with quote  #17 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Francois Lagrange

I’ve a copy of Rusduck’s The Cardiste. In it, Rusduck describes for the first time the idea of a staystack and its applications, as well as many other stack applications. It’s a quirky but great magazine (that you can purchase from Lybrary).



I bought my first copy of the Cardiste from Peter Duffie about 11 years ago and recently (2015) the Conjuring Arts Research Center made it available for free as part of the Summer Reading Program. Now you can get it for about $20. This version includes issue 13 (which I did not get in the Duffie version). 


If interested, you can also get it here: 

http://shop.conjuringarts.org/store/pc/Cardiste-Magazine-PDF-53p1307.htm#.WbFSBcgjG01


__________________
Luigimar
Magic is Within...
0
Zedd

Member
Registered:
Posts: 6
Reply with quote  #18 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Logan Five


I use Martin Nash's closer called Ovation. It's in his Charming Cheat series of video's. However, you need to do a deck switch before the effect.

I haven't found a way to bring in the "cooler" that I like, but I still practice this.


Or you do some effects with the MD, shuffle it into staystack and finish with it [wave]
0
Dave Campbell

Inner Circle
Registered:
Posts: 696
Reply with quote  #19 
I know I'm very late to this post, but I'm also very new to the forum 😉

I have all (I think) of the Aronson books, and when his stack first hit, I memorized it. I then went through about a 7-year period of intense concentration on my job and writing, speaking, and travelling, and Magic ended up taking a backseat. As you all quite understand, the memorization went out the window.

Once I got back into magic about 4 years ago, it had been my intention to get the Aronson stack back into memory, but then the Redford stack came along. I bought the book to see what was the buzz, and then he has a FB group of folks sharing things about it, and I went that way.

I've never used Si Stebbins although there are some very interesting things you can do with it, and since as was explained above, you can use what essentially looks like a phone number and go from RS to Stebbins, and when you're done you can 'phone home' and go back. 

So now I consider Si Stebbins effects to be more available than before such as one Cameron Francis has on his "Out of Sleight" DVD called "Creation" ... I've seen it elsewhere as well, but I like his presentation.

Of course many stack-agnostic things in other books are also do-able.

__________________

-=Dave=-
0
mac1054

Inner Circle
Registered:
Posts: 106
Reply with quote  #20 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rudy Tinoco
Hi Fellas,

I've heard some good things over at the Cafe about the Redford stack.

One of the things that I don't like about the Tamariz stack is how clunky it is to get in NDO.
I'm considering changing to the Redford stack. Have any of you taken a look at it?

Rudy


Hi Rudy, I’m curious, what was the final outcome for you? Did you switch to the Redford Stack? Still using it or ?
0
Bob Farmer

Honored Member
Registered:
Posts: 342
Reply with quote  #21 
In my book, The Bammo Tarodiction Toolbox, I have a method for getting into ANY stack in less than 2 minutes.
0
RayJ

Avatar / Picture

Honored Member
Registered:
Posts: 3,385
Reply with quote  #22 
Maigret, you bring up a number of very good points.  There is a forest out there and it is tough, especially for beginners, to find the trees.

To me it is important to recognize why you learned a particular MD in the first place.  Was it because a popular magician used it?  Was it because it contained some built-in stacks?  Was it because you could achieve the order from NDO fairly quickly?
Or was it just a starting point with little regard to any or all of the above.

Perfect doesn't exist and as you rightly state, there is no "best".  Choice is a process of informed compromises.  To get one thing you typically have to give up something else.

To put a positive spin on it, perhaps it is only natural to want to change to a new MD after a time.  Perhaps it is just part of your evolution.  You've spent months, or more likely years with the stack, so hopefully you have spent time exploring its attributes and have had enough time to properly evaluate it.  Perhaps it isn't a matter of "the grass is greener on the other side" as much as wanting to explore the possibilities of a new thing now that you've got some experience.  Maybe the first one wasn't everything you hoped it would be?

So if you are considering changing, ask yourself how you got to that point.  And what do you hope to achieve.
0
Dave Campbell

Inner Circle
Registered:
Posts: 696
Reply with quote  #23 
As I and others have pointed out before, there's a metric boat load of stack-agnostic memdeck material. 

Each stack has some stuff built into it for one reason or another. Going into it is not necessary but I chose Redford. But that doesn't mean that a lot of the Aronson material goes out the window... only the parts that use the special something built-in.

In another group I'm in, I feel the members are somewhat 'guided' by the leader into Mnemonica. I suppose once they have the stack memorized and are comfortable using it that it really doesn't matter because of all the reasons stated. But I didn't like what felt like a 'push' to learn what he uses.

Michael Close lectures on doing your homework before deciding... that is solid information.

__________________

-=Dave=-
0
pnielan

Inner Circle
Registered:
Posts: 133
Reply with quote  #24 
I've been working with Mnemonica for 8 years and will not switch. Agree with Maigret on that. The order is ingrained and speed/facility is important. But love reading Redford's material and approach (and Aronson's). I think I could come up with a stack that's better for ME than Mnemonica, but I don't believe it would be worth the mental hesitation that might last years. Also, Dennis Behr's thinking is so good and he uses the same stack. And maybe Juan still has more to release.  (I'll never master a fraction of that stuff. How many card tricks can you master/do in a lifetime with a job and family? I've been honing 2-3 for the last year.)

That said, I try to memorize a 1/2 deck in 3-4 minutes every few days using Lorayne-type methods and have also been relearning some of his Pseudo effects, which only require memorizing a smaller number of cards. I'm experimenting with Pseudo-Memory 1 as an out trick. If I lose the selection/mess up the control, I can ask the spectator to place the selection at a position from 1-10 to to lock in the card and a number, and then do the effect. It's not as good as Harry's intentional blocking, but it's pretty good as an out trick.
0
Rudy Tinoco

Avatar / Picture

Founding Member
Registered:
Posts: 4,762
Reply with quote  #25 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mac1054


Hi Rudy, I’m curious, what was the final outcome for you? Did you switch to the Redford Stack? Still using it or ?

Hi mac1054,

I just memorized the Redford Stack this past Thursday. My final decision was based on Mike Powers recommendation. I value his opinion very much. I'm still waiting for my book to arrive, but when you purchase from Patrick you get a PDF that gives you what you need to get started on memorizing the stack.

I used Harry's system to memorize the first 40 cards (took about an hour) and then had to leave for a meeting. I came back home and finished memorizing the rest.

The pegs took a bit longer because I wanted to use slightly different ones that what I used to memorize the Tamariz stack. Interestingly, I think that I was worried for nothing. I've been testing myself and have found that I can jump from one stack order to the other without thinking much about it. Our brain is a powerful thing!

Anyone can have a deck memorized within an hours time. You just have to put in a little work at the front end by getting the pegs solidified in your mind. Harry has done a lot of the work for you by providing us with memorable images to hang the cards onto.

I'm looking forward to getting the Redford book so that I can start working through the material.

Rudy


__________________
www.youtube.com/themagiciansforum
http://www.facebook.com/themagiciansforum
0
Mike Powers

Avatar / Picture

Honored Member
Registered:
Posts: 2,389
Reply with quote  #26 
I think you'll find some good stuff in the Redford book, Rudy. Of course, all stack independent stuff is immediately useful with any stack. I think there are sequences in Redford that are related to Si Stebbins which may help with gaining facility. It is cool that you can go from Redford to Stebbins and back with exactly the same (not reversed) sequence of overhand shuffles. 

I'm just hoping that my OLD memory retains Aronson! So far so good. 

Mike
0
Rudy Tinoco

Avatar / Picture

Founding Member
Registered:
Posts: 4,762
Reply with quote  #27 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maigret

Recently I have the impression that "changing from memorized deck" has become a hobby in itself. There are undoubtedly psychological and perfectly explainable reasons for this. I designed an expression for it: memorized deck hopping.

If time permits, I intend to write an extensive article about it (Why I think that people who usually only have a few years or even less experience with an MD, do this).

It confuses people who want to learn a memorized deck and they no longer see the trees through the forest.
Moreover, they think it is "normal" that people simply switch stacks, while of course the intention is that you have the same memorized deck for your entire life and that you get better and better with it.
Only people who have yet to start learning an MD have the luxury of doing "memorized deck hopping" among the many good stacks that are being published but of which none is better than the others.

I am therefore also struck by how some people solemnly proclaim what the "best" stack is.
If they would at least write what the best stack is for them, I could live with it.
As if there is a "best" stack. That is such another myth.
There is simply NO best stack. Weird that Aronson, Close and Ortiz agree with me ... but what do they know about a MD [wink]

I have yet to write the article, but I already know the conclusion.
Stay with the stack that you currently know. (as long as it is a memorized deck)

For clarity's sake: this post is not directed at any person from this forum or this thread, but it is a general observation of what I read on several forums.
This forum is, by the way, one of the most decent forums without any ordinary mutual abuse.
Congratulations for that Rudy! (and of course to all members of this forum)



Thanks for dropping by to share your thoughts with us! You are quite an authority on the memorized deck so I truly value your opinion. 

I kind of laughed when you said that some of us are guilty of "memorized deck hopping". That's funny but true. 

Staying with the Tamariz stack may have been the better choice, but like most magicians, I'm guilty of always searching for the holy grail of magic. That's my I have a closet full of magic that I'll never use. On the other hand, my constant pursuit for greater magic has led to some wonderful discoveries. For example, I recently found an oil and water routine that I wish I could keep for myself because it truly seems impossible.

Anyway, I look forward to reading your essay 😉

Rudy

p.s. Thank you for your kind words regarding the Magician's Forum!!

__________________
www.youtube.com/themagiciansforum
http://www.facebook.com/themagiciansforum
0
Alan

Inner Circle
Registered:
Posts: 102
Reply with quote  #28 
Hi Rudy,
I am curious to know if you did change over to the Redford stack and any thoughts you have to share after having decided to do so or not do so. Thanks for anything you care to share. Best,
Alan
0
RayJ

Avatar / Picture

Honored Member
Registered:
Posts: 3,385
Reply with quote  #29 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan
Hi Rudy,
I am curious to know if you did change over to the Redford stack and any thoughts you have to share after having decided to do so or not do so. Thanks for anything you care to share. Best,
Alan


Alan, Rudy may or may not see your question, but if you copy his message within your post I think it will alert him.  Might be a faster way of getting a response.
0
Anthony Vinson

Avatar / Picture

Honored Member
Registered:
Posts: 3,150
Reply with quote  #30 
As the OP, Rudy is automatically subscribed to the topic and will be notified when posts are added... unless he's subsequently unsubscribed.

Av
0
RayJ

Avatar / Picture

Honored Member
Registered:
Posts: 3,385
Reply with quote  #31 
As I said, may or may not.
0
Rudy Tinoco

Avatar / Picture

Founding Member
Registered:
Posts: 4,762
Reply with quote  #32 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan
Hi Rudy,
I am curious to know if you did change over to the Redford stack and any thoughts you have to share after having decided to do so or not do so. Thanks for anything you care to share. Best,
Alan


I'm glad that the other fellas bumped this thread. I didn't see your question, Alan.

I haven't completely switched over, but have both memorized. Unfortunately, after memorizing the Redford stack, I haven't made the time to make my way through the book.

One thing that I noticed (and that I didn't feel comfortable with) is that in order to get into Si Stebbins you have to run a number of cards singly, 9 times. I'm sure that you've read certain tricks that require you to run a few cards in an overhand shuffle. Doing that a couple of times is fine, but can be a bit suspect if you try to run (for example) 10 cards. The spectator might think that you're doing something, because you are.

Getting in and out of Si Stebbins from the Redford stack has you running anywhere from 1 to 8 cards. I won't share the actually sequence, but grab a deck of cards and try running the following number of cards singly (overhand shuffle) and then throw the balance of cards on top between each run:

546-138-254

Then you finish by cutting a number of cards from the top to bottom.

That number takes you from Redford to Stebbins and back again. Very cool!! But doesn't it feel a bit cumbersome? I doubt that I would do that in front of a spectator. Maybe there are some ways (maybe an effect) that he's come up with to hide that(?). 

Since I haven't read the book, I can't say.

Your question has encourage me to pick up the book again. I'll report back in a few weeks.

Thanks for asking, Alan!

Rudy

__________________
www.youtube.com/themagiciansforum
http://www.facebook.com/themagiciansforum
0
Barden

Inner Circle
Registered:
Posts: 49
Reply with quote  #33 
I think we all suffer, to some degree, from the grass is greener syndrome.  As soon as we choose a stack, all we see are the advantages of the other stacks we did not choose. Buyers remorse is another way of putting it. I chose mnemonica. If my resolve to stick with mnemonica wavers at all, I just go back to Tamariz, Hartling, Behr and Asi Wind. They set me straight.
0
Rudy Tinoco

Avatar / Picture

Founding Member
Registered:
Posts: 4,762
Reply with quote  #34 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barden
I think we all suffer, to some degree, from the grass is greener syndrome.  As soon as we choose a stack, all we see are the advantages of the other stacks we did not choose. Buyers remorse is another way of putting it. I chose mnemonica. If my resolve to stick with mnemonica wavers at all, I just go back to Tamariz, Hartling, Behr and Asi Wind. They set me straight.


I think that you’re probably right, Barden.

The interesting thing is that I have no trouble distinguishing between the Mnemonica and the Radford stack in my head. They are both locked in and I don’t confuse the two. Maybe there is a significant advantage in having two stacks memorized.

Once I’ve gone through Patrick’s book, I’ll have the ability to make an informed opinion on the matter.




__________________
www.youtube.com/themagiciansforum
http://www.facebook.com/themagiciansforum
0
RandyHak

Member
Registered:
Posts: 2
Reply with quote  #35 
Have you seen the Patrick Redford perform the 'Temporary Out of Order'?
He moves from Redford to Staystack to Si Stebbins easily during performance. Sometimes even done by the spectator. I think it is a beautifully structured stacked deck routine.

I think in his book are some really deceptive (shuffle) techniques for working with any stacked deck. Also take a look at his false shuffle project. I was learning mnemonica when I decided to switch to Redford because of possibility to shuffle into differetn stacks. It took me about 2 weeks to learn card to number and visa versa. I still have to practise a lot for ACAAN etc. But being in Covid Lockdown it is the perfect time to put in the work[smile]

To learn the stack I used my own version of Rick Lax Mnemonica Trainer. I used the same characters, but in different combinations. I also used my a lot of my own 'symbols' for the numbers.
0
Mike Powers

Avatar / Picture

Honored Member
Registered:
Posts: 2,389
Reply with quote  #36 
It's true that the procedure for getting from Redford to Stebbins (and vice versa)is a bit lengthy. But it consists in legitimate looking overhand shuffles. They don't have to all be done at once. You can do four shuffle sequences and put the deck down and then finish after a bit of patter.

I learned Darwin's method for getting into Stebbins from new deck order. Patrick gives a similar method. But I don't really see myself ever using one of these methods in a show. I'd just stack the deck ahead of time and use a deck switch. Why open a new deck and go through a long process during a show??

There are tricks in the Redford book that are based on his stack. Since you know the stack, you should look those up. They're meant for Redford stack.

Mike
0
Mbreggar

Avatar / Picture

Inner Circle
Registered:
Posts: 751
Reply with quote  #37 
Like Randy, I too decided to take advantage of our quarantine conditions to learn a stack. But which one?
There’s been lots of talk here about the Redford stack lately ... is that the most “flexible”. Frankly, I am vacillating between Tamariz and Aragon’s stack. Mnemonica has certainly stood the test of time and I really like the way you can (almost) assemble Memorandum from a shuffled deck.

In the end, I’m not certain learning one stack over another provides a significant advantage over learning ANY stack/memdeck. It seems knowing the positions of the cards is the most relevant feature of any of these. Getting in and out of a memdeck, like Mike P notes, should not be the prime factor.

I am confident once I finally decide, using Harry’s methods (which have also stood the test of time) I’ll finally be able to confidently perform some memdeck work!
0
Dave Campbell

Inner Circle
Registered:
Posts: 696
Reply with quote  #38 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mbreggar


In the end, I’m not certain learning one stack over another provides a significant advantage over learning ANY stack/memdeck. It seems knowing the positions of the cards is the most relevant feature of any of these. Getting in and out of a memdeck, like Mike P notes, should not be the prime factor.


Michael -- that's exactly my thought!

If someone wants to memorize a deck to do a specific effect by someone that relies on the features of a certain stack, then I'd tell him to sit back and rethink what he's trying to do.

There's tons of material out there that is stack independent, and that includes books by stack authors. Even though I have all of Aronson's books, I don't use his stack. Does it limit me from some things in Simon's books - yeah, but just by having ANY stack memorized opens up all sorts of fun things you can do.

I know some folks use a stack that their 'hero' uses .. well ok, and if you are really interested in doing effects that use the features of THAT stack, then why not.

Personally, I don't have to go back to any author to validate my choice -- I look in the mirror and say 'hey -- I have a stack MEMORIZED' -- so that opens up a door to another large area of card magic. And for me, that's the right answer.



__________________

-=Dave=-
0
Jim Straight

Inner Circle
Registered:
Posts: 38
Reply with quote  #39 
I learned Aronson's stack a couple years ago.  Since I was new to card magic then, I chose Aronson for pretty arbitrary reasons.  Since then, I have yet to learn any of the cool tricks that are specific to his stack such as the poker deals that are built into his stack.  All the tricks I've learned have been stack independent.  Pit Hartling and Denis Behr have created some of my favorites.

However, I am tempted to learn Redford.  Why?  I like the idea of being able to get into stack order from NDO (I am aware you can do the same for Tamariz).  I giggle every time a shuffle into Stebbins from NDO using the Ortiz method and I know a few Stebbins tricks.  I also like that you can get into Stebbins from a shuffled deck using Br. John Hamman's Chinese shuffle.  These may not be the best reason's to learn a new stack but, hey, I've got time!
0
Dave Campbell

Inner Circle
Registered:
Posts: 696
Reply with quote  #40 
stacks are like anything else... you have to drill on them, or it slips away.

I have a speed cube next to my chair where I watch TV … and I try to mess up and solve it a couple times an evening.. same thing with counts and shuffles.

I use an electric toothbrush and find I can run through my entire memdeck stack while brushing my teeth 😉

Of course using it in the heat of battle is good too, and the real test... but if you don't keep tools sharp, they can cause problems!

__________________

-=Dave=-
0
Mbreggar

Avatar / Picture

Inner Circle
Registered:
Posts: 751
Reply with quote  #41 
They used to say you should replicate your study atmosphere when you take an exam. Does that mean you brush your teeth during your performance??!
0
Mike Powers

Avatar / Picture

Honored Member
Registered:
Posts: 2,389
Reply with quote  #42 
Alan - Pat Page has (had) some work on memorizing Stebbins. I'm not sure if it's in print?? If I find it, I'll pass it along. In the end you must know the stack number of every card and every card by its stack number. Pat had some ways that made that easier with Stebbins.

Mike
0
Alan

Inner Circle
Registered:
Posts: 102
Reply with quote  #43 

Hi Rudy,

Thanks for your response and to all the others that have commented as well. RayJ and Anthony Vinson, thanks for the tips on making sure my post gets noticed.

Over a decade ago I learned the Aronson stack. I had the memorization down well but never got up to speed on estimate/cut/check/adjust, and some of the mental math required in order to have it mastered for performance, thus eventually stopped working on it.

Now that I want to give a stack another try and have long forgotten the Aronson order, I am essentially starting from scratch and find some features of the Redford stack to be very alluring. 

As others have said though, which stack I decide upon is probably of minor importance versus having ANY stack memorized. I agree with that intellectually, but still I’ve been stuck in the trap of wasting too much time trying to decide which is “best” for me. I’m going to try to break that cycle today and start learning the Redford stack.

-Alan

0
Matt G

Inner Circle
Registered:
Posts: 123
Reply with quote  #44 
I can't speak about "better" because Temporarily Out of Order is the only Mem-Deck book I've ever purchased, but I am absolutely loving it. It's a truly brilliant stack. The effects are killer and I really enjoy Patrick's way of describing things and thinking through things.
0
JenniferG

Inner Circle
Registered:
Posts: 441
Reply with quote  #45 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Powers
I went through the new book carefully in order to write the forward for Patrick. He's posted on this site. I'd go directly to the source.

What I like is the ability to get to Stebbins from new deck and then through a series of overhand shuffles, to Redford stack. The cool thing is you can get back to Stebbins with exactly the same sequence of shuffles. Also you can get to Stay stack as well. There's a bunch of built in items like poker deals too. Talk to Patrick.

Mike


I got Mnemonica book the other day and started reading it.  I am liking the StayStack, just 4 out faros off from European New Deck Order.  Then Mnemonica is very few steps from StayStack. 

Since you say you can get into StayStack with Redford, then that means you can get into Mnemonica from Redford easily enough?   I know how to get back to StayStack from Mnemonica.  And I assume I can go back to Redford from StaySTack?

This is exciting as I know both the Redford and Mnemonica stacks now.. and I want to do stuff with Sti Stebbens and StayStack as well.   

Time to get really good at the faros!

Btw, I wish the NDO in the USA was the same as in Europe.. it's better for magic due to the tricks one can do with StayStack.  Lots of extra work to get from US NDO to European NDO.
0
luigimar

Avatar / Picture

Honored Member - Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 1,566
Reply with quote  #46 
Just a quick note... StayStack is not another memorized deck, it is Dynamic... in the sense that you can keep shuffling (with real shuffles) and still be in StayStack... really far, far away fom any stack and still do great effects with it. The StayStack you get from/to Mnemonica is different from/to the one you get from Redford or any other memorized deck. 

I'm sorry I am a little cryptic here but we are in the open area of the forum, where we cannot discuss methods so openly... 

__________________
Luigimar
Magic is Within...
0
Mike Powers

Avatar / Picture

Honored Member
Registered:
Posts: 2,389
Reply with quote  #47 
Luigimar is correct - staystack is not a specific ordering of the deck. It's an ordering of the cards that maintains the underlying property (mirror order)  through any number of faro shuffles, including off center 26/26 faros. Once you have performed a Faro, there's not going to be any way to easily get back to the original order and therefore no way back to your mem deck.

Maybe you're thinking of Si Stebbins order rather than StayStack? Redford can go to Stebbins through a series of overhand shuffles. And, conversely, you can get from Stebbins back to Redford stack using the exact same sequence of overhand shuffles. I think Tamariz stack has some relationship to Stebbins as well.

M
0
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.